 |
|
Caligastia
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Boshko
Because in a lot of case it is racism. Cali has stated that he believes that there are fundamental differences between the races, thus having him fit the dictionary definition of racism. |
Is it fair to lump everyone who believes in racial differences in with a negative term like "racism"? Believing there are significant racial differences does not necessarily make one a bad person.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Caligastia
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MikeH
If you assume the difference is because of race first (especially if you are looking at something as unrepresentative as skin colour rather than a genuine ethnic grouping), and writing off any other societal factors then it's racist. |
I would never assume race to be a factor without giving any consideration to societal factors. Of course there are environmental influences. I just don't think they explain everything.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Elok
|
 |
Land of Ramen Dragons
Mar 2003
time: 00:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MikeH
You really aren't that stupid PA, your 'I'll pretend to be a homophobic, racist, mysoginist to annoy people' game is getting very boring. |
Quiet, you! While people are pointing and laughing at him, they can't point and laugh at my Monkey thread!
Anyway, race is not that major of a difference where behavior is concerned. PA's example of men and women is not intrinsically sexist, because there are in fact considerable differences between the thought and behavior patterns of the two sexes, which might conceivably affect the crime rate. There are also hormonal differences. But a black guy raised by a caucasian family will "act white," and the differences in blood chemistry and other things that might affect behavior in black vs. white men is, so far as I know, minimal. Until some sort of reputable study shows otherwise, there is no reason to conclude that blacks carry a "crime gene," or whatever it is you're implying.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Japher
|
 |
Ook! Ook! Ack! Ack! Ack!
Jun 2002
time: 05:35
|
|
quote:
If you assume the difference is because of race first (especially if you are looking at something as unrepresentative as skin colour rather than a genuine ethnic grouping), and writing off any other societal factors then it's racist.
If you can prove that no other cultural / social things have an influence then say what you want.
|
Why?
Cultural and Social specificities are inherent to certain races. Race is a factor inherent to culture, is it not? If not, than AA is wrong, and I am just as much a Native American as any Cherokee ever was.
Also, note that culture is determined by a specific race within a specific society. This gives rise to “Chinatowns”, “Ghettos”, “Little Italy’s”, etc… The factors that determine the attitudes, attributes, and practiced abilities (not what they can do, but what they DO do) of people from that area are determined by social norms intrinsic to the people who reside in these areas. Thus, by throwing out cultural and sociological specifications I would be, by default, throwing out race as a factor. By addressing race one is automatically addressing culture and society.
You may say that it is prejudice, and yes it is. However, prejudices do not come without merit (except for Tass being mormon), and in the case of crime, AA, and other such programs/profiling, without statistical significance.
Yaay!! I fed the Troll
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jon Miller
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
If the difference you are noticing is that, on average, black people have a darker shade of skin that white people, I'll heartily agree.
If the difference you are asserting is that black people are more likely to commit crimes than white ones then I invite you to provide your corroboration, and I look forward to ripping it to shreds.
How about putting your balls on the line, Parky? |
I think that on average black people have bigger dicks than white people
Jon Miller
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ErikM
|
|
Well said Japher.
I find it mildly amusing that in American culture it is socially acceptable to say something like "French are frog-eating cowards", "Russians are drunks", or "Germans are Nazis" while if someone does as much as to hint for some correlation between crime rate and the race (or what have you), he will be immediately labelled as the racist.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Space05us
|
|
Race should be ignored altogether.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
JimmyCracksCorn
|
|
Macedonia - Sovereign country north of Greece.
Dec 2002
time: 05:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Caligastia
Is it fair to lump everyone who believes in racial differences in with a negative term like "racism"? Believing there are significant racial differences does not necessarily make one a bad person. |
There are some racial differences, for example some races have larger and/or narrower arteries, have higher or lower brows, some have larger skulls. Of course this is all "on average".
I don't think Cali meant it in a racist way, because there are observable, anotomical differences between races. However, this does not translate in any way to intelligence, which I don't think he ever suggested.
Although there is growing evidence that some isolated races (like Aus. aborigines) might have different learning styles than the rest of us, but this still doesn't mean they are less intelligent.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
The Mad Viking
|
 |
of the Great White North
Feb 2000
time: 05:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Park Avenue
When we find something "negative" out about ethnic minorities, why are people so quick to shout "racism"?
|
Wen you associate a negative trait with an ethnic minority, you presume that any individual of that ethnic minority has a prediliction towards that negative trait.
That is about as textbook a definition of racism as you can have.
quote:
You know, maybe if it is found that one sector of society commits more crimes, then that sector is more criminal.
|
Do you understand that this is a chicken and egg argument?
Hypothetically speaking, IF racism against blacks exists in society (& the criminal justice system)-
you would see more blacks stopped by police
you would see more blacks arrested by police
you would see more blacks charged by prosecutors
you would see more blacks convicted.
This would lead someone from the planet ZORK, conducting an impartial review of crime statistics, to conclude that blacks COMMIT more crimes.
Yet there is actually no evidence for this. White committing crimes may not have been stopped; they may have been let go with a warning; the prosecutor may have decided there was not enough evidence; the jury may have found their pleas more believable.
Your position is that you BELIEVE blacks commit more crimes because of some trait magically linked to their skin colour, jumping ability and affinity for collard greens.
From that viewpoint, sure, blacks must be more criminal.
But you must know, there is a great chasm between committing crimes and being convicted for them.
Most crimes go unreported. Most reported crimes go unsolved. Many guilty parties are acquited. Heck, many crimes are attributed by the courts to innocent parties.
Given that racism is known to exist, how can you discount it as the factor that generates the statistics that support racism?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
JimmyCracksCorn
|
|
Macedonia - Sovereign country north of Greece.
Dec 2002
time: 05:35
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Technically it does. |
There are no significant differences between races, as we are all about 99.99999% genetically identical. And the .0000001 is the information which determines your skin color and other various family and/or ethnic features. But these do translate into racial differences, so Cali is correct.
Though keep in mind you're also 95% identical to a chimp, and 50% gentically indentical to a banana.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:35.
Apolyton Time is 00:35. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
30-03-2004 15:08
|